The most underestimated synths...

[wagtunes]

I was watching the last episode of Home Improvement and the construction workers came on the set and made music with their tools and shit you'd never think of to use for making music. It was absolutely the most amazing thing I'd ever heard.

From Show



Outtakes

[ghettosynth]

My typing "IS" organized and if I intend for it to be music, then, I contend that it "IS" music, but if I don't, then it isn't?

Yeah, that's my difficulty with intent. At some point it encourages people to be pretentious artwankers and do things like put a chair in a room and call it an installation.

But maybe there is another side to this. What is it about your typing on the keyboard - structured or not - that would make most people laugh if you tried to pass it off as music?

Well, I don't have to convince most people that it's music. However, I suspect that if you asked people who did not know who Todd Dockstader is that there would be very little difference in the distributions between my typing and this piece.

Heck, I think even if you tapped a 4/4 beat, most people wouldn't think it was really music. But why?

Again, I don't feel like I have to convince most people. I think that I could convince most people that bird song slowed down with paulstretch was music and, by our discussion here so far, it wouldn't be. In some sense, my typing somehow conveys more of my own musical intent/skill.

You can claim that this isn't music because you know it's source, but, if you didn't, at what point would you assert that it's not music?



Or this? Is simple aesthetic combined with intent and some production skill enough to be a "maker of music?"

[sjm]

You can claim that this isn't music because you know it's source, but, if you didn't, at what point would you assert that it's not music?

I guess the key thing is that the cricket doesn't actually sound like that. You've thrown a human into the mix with the intention of changing the sound. It sounds a bit like whale "song" to me.

That said, the original sound of the cricket is musical in and of itself and could easily be used as part of a piece of music.


I guess I'd say to me there is a distinction between sounds with a musical quality and actual "music". I don't think the Windows sound is a song, although Brian Eno did say that he approached it like a song, albeit a 4s once.


Skip to 1:15 if you want to get to the "song".


I bet a lot of people would also say the "noise" at the end isn't music. It's not very musical, I'll give you that, but I think it is music.

[sjm]

I was watching the last episode of Home Improvement and the construction workers came on the set and made music with their tools and shit you'd never think of to use for making music. It was absolutely the most amazing thing I'd ever heard.

I sometimes spend an hour or so surfing round YT watching various street performers make music from the most random assortment of junk. It's very inspiring.

[cron]

I was going to reply that Dario Rossi has an incredible knack for making junk percussion sound like x0x (e.g., 808, 909) drums, but upon listening again I'm wondering what made me think it. None of the hits really sound like an x0x in isolation like I originally thought when digging it out, and perhaps it's more the intuitive understanding of dance music drum programming conventions he applies to his gear that makes me immediately think 'x0x'.

[Armagibbon]

I'd slow it down and stretch it out to about three hours. In fact, that sounds like a project, brb.

shit's gonna be A E S T H E T I C

I'm digging it. Gonna wrap this one up and tie a bow on it. Turned out an hour was about right. Time to go fill up someone else's hard drives.

Link it when you drop it?

I need to hear this. Crazy Bus being listenable is a new summit for humanity.

Listenable? Well, that depends on one's POV. I fell asleep to it last night, does that count?

Interesting factoid, it took longer to render than it did to...wait for it..."compose."

And here I thought you wouldn't go the lazy way out! Color me disappointed.

The summit awaits...

[Armagibbon]

But maybe there is another side to this. What is it about your typing on the keyboard - structured or not - that would make most people laugh if you tried to pass it off as music?

Heck, I think even if you tapped a 4/4 beat, most people wouldn't think it was really music. But why?

What do you got against keyboard sounds?
I've got cherry blues. I think I'm entitled to use my keyboard as a shitty drum kit when I want to buddy.

[JPQ]

One in start side this thread asked difference beetween predator/albino compared blue say even old thing albion can be go warmer i feel but blue can go rougher and albino has few filter models what i miss other synths saddly there is nothing which can replace albino when stops working i feel.

[ghettosynth]

I'd slow it down and stretch it out to about three hours. In fact, that sounds like a project, brb.

shit's gonna be A E S T H E T I C

I'm digging it. Gonna wrap this one up and tie a bow on it. Turned out an hour was about right. Time to go fill up someone else's hard drives.

Link it when you drop it?

I need to hear this. Crazy Bus being listenable is a new summit for humanity.

Listenable? Well, that depends on one's POV. I fell asleep to it last night, does that count?

Interesting factoid, it took longer to render than it did to...wait for it..."compose."

And here I thought you wouldn't go the lazy way out! Color me disappointed.

The summit awaits...

Indeed! Sounds like a new KVR challenge.

[tripleflows]

So, why do you think, in your opinion, it is underestimated? Maybe because the protection method?

1. Obviously it can not be stolen easily
2. There are only a few 3rd parties libraries out there for Retrologue
3. The (very professional) Steinberg VSTi department is somehow still in the dark, including both the pr and the marketing of their products
4. Folks are still thinking it is tied to Cubase only...

It is a good idea to move anything softeLicenser to the USB key, just to make sure you have it in case of machine breakdown, etc.

[EnGee]

So, why do you think, in your opinion, it is underestimated? Maybe because the protection method?

1. Obviously it can not be stolen easily
2. There are only a few 3rd parties libraries out there for Retrologue
3. The (very professional) Steinberg VSTi department is somehow still in the dark, including both the pr and the marketing of their products
4. Folks are still thinking it is tied to Cubase only...

It is a good idea to move anything softeLicenser to the USB key, just to make sure you have it in case of machine breakdown, etc.

Good points!

Yes, I already have the license in the USB dongle. It's very stable this way, while with the software e-licenser it gave me headaches (all Steinberg's products did!).

[jancivil]

As to the absurdity of 'measuring' the quality of music, by the analogy of MPG usage in automobiles:
first, that's not even close to a good analogy. It applies a measure which, well, doesn't apply. So it sounded good to you, what? It's perfectly circular to itself, of course. A done deal, that's all the thought you need.

I used the analogy of something that doesn't hold together, because of the obvious: poor materials & shoddy workmanship.

Can some music begin with poor materials? How is this such an impossibility?
And then, even if the materials chosen have been shown to work before, can there not be shoddy workmanship?

The comparison Beer Barrel Polka vs Beethoven's 9th was tried. Well, this is not exactly apples to apples.
But let's go with both of them being spherical: which part of the 9th are we comparing to that tune (please note that there's more to a large symphony than a mere tune)? Shall we go with the 'Ode to Joy' theme that's very famous?
For a qualitative judgment to be impossible, the thing that has to be impossible is 'these are not constructions, in any way.' But this isn't true. A melody can be looked at, at least the likes of the Ode to Joy theme can be, in exactly these terms. And even should Ludwig van have used a coarse popular tune, his treatment of it will have done something to it. Else, you have a bizarre belief in place of looking at a thing using your reason. Or applying some learning to it, instead. Before I write a paper on it, it's you, wagtunes, who has made the assertion. Is it a very examined premise? I bet that it is not.

But let's do look at apples to apples: Steven Wagenheim's Symphony vs any of Haydn's, Mozart's, Beethoven's, et cetera. Come on, man. Materials and workmanship. IT APPLIES.

[jancivil]

My typing "IS" organized and if I intend for it to be music, then, I contend that it "IS" music, but if I don't, then it isn't?

Yeah, that's my difficulty with intent. At some point it encourages people to be pretentious artwankers and do things like put a chair in a room and call it an installation.

So, then, your opinion of their behavior or even personality type makes you mistrustful of their intent, hence probably not music?

Heck, I think even if you tapped a 4/4 beat, most people wouldn't think it was really music. But why?

So for you the mere 4/4 beat is closer to music than the rhythmic typing, organized as it is albeit not purely a known musical type of organization?

If I take something as music, that's that. You're not going to persuade me otherwise. That's my choice.
Call that me as composer applying editing to 'found music', whatever. A bird, some traffic noise.

At this point we're in a swamp of other people's opinions, and I chose this one as illustrative of one I would not rely on for my definition.

Equally, when someone says 'this is music', puts that frame around it, I may as well take them at their word, so to speak. And judge for myself if it's worth continuing to experience it. When a frame so specific as 'Symphony in G major' or something is used, I may decide to judge it according to some prerequisites, though. When it does purport to be exactly what that looks like, I will.

[wagtunes]

As to the absurdity of 'measuring' the quality of music, by the analogy of MPG usage in automobiles:
first, that's not even close to a good analogy. It applies a measure which, well, doesn't apply. So it sounded good to you, what? It's perfectly circular to itself, of course. A done deal, that's all the thought you need.

I used the analogy of something that doesn't hold together, because of the obvious: poor materials & shoddy workmanship.

Can some music begin with poor materials? How is this such an impossibility?
And then, even if the materials chosen have been shown to work before, can there not be shoddy workmanship?

The comparison Beer Barrel Polka vs Beethoven's 9th was tried. Well, this is not exactly apples to apples.
But let's go with both of them being spherical: which part of the 9th are we comparing to that tune (please note that there's more to a large symphony than a mere tune)? Shall we go with the 'Ode to Joy' theme that's very famous?
For a qualitative judgment to be impossible, the thing that has to be impossible is 'these are not constructions, in any way.' But this isn't true. A melody can be looked at, at least the likes of the Ode to Joy theme can be, in exactly these terms. And even should Ludwig van have used a coarse popular tune, his treatment of it will have done something to it. Else, you have a bizarre belief in place of looking at a thing using your reason. Or applying some learning to it, instead. Before I write a paper on it, it's you, wagtunes, who has made the assertion. Is it a very examined premise? I bet that it is not.

But let's do look at apples to apples: Steven Wagenheim's Symphony vs any of Haydn's, Mozart's, Beethoven's, et cetera. Come on, man. Materials and workmanship. IT APPLIES.

It is only out of pure boredom and having finished by work for the day that I am even responding to this.

I can't speak for everybody else. But when I listen to music, I do it for the sole purpose to feel something. It doesn't necessarily have to be to feel good. Maybe I want a good cry and so I'll listen to Les Mis. Maybe I want to feel sexy and so I'll listen to one of those sax laden porn soundtracks. Maybe I want to feel exhilarated. If so, I'll listen to Star Wars or Indiana Jones. If I want a good laugh, I'll listen to the Benny Hill theme.

I can't speak for you but music makes me feel something. It isn't something I can clinically calculate with an abacus. It isn't a scientific formula.

Now, it's been said that Bach's compositions have a mathematical precision to them. I don't doubt this. I'm sure Bach used lots of theory to compose his works.

But that theory in and of itself is not good or bad music. We, as humans, have decided that a person who uses these "proper" tools of composition (because that's where this is all ultimately going, isn't it?) composes "good" music and those who do not compose bad music. I mean if we want to narrow this down to the absolute nuts and bolts, that's the bottom line.

But again, it is man (a flawed species) who has decided this. Actually, to be more specific, it is CERTAIN men who have decided this. I don't see a definition in the dictionary or encyclopedia for "bad music." Do you? I mean, if something is an absolute fact, shouldn't it be defined somewhere if for no other reason than for me to look up the term so that I can avoid making THAT kind of music?

Now, having said all that, I do not deny that there are composers who are better at evoking certain emotions than others.

For example. I love watching TV shows and movies with soundtracks. The underscoring on some of these things is truly amazing. I can't think of any off the top of my head because there are so many people who are so good at doing this.

Now, this is something I don't have a gift for. You want to call it talent? That's fine. You can call it talent. You can even call it something that was learned because I have no proof that it can't be. I just never took the time to try to learn it. But let's say it can be learned. Let's say it's a combination of the two, learned and talent.

I think you'd agree that John Williams is probably one of the greats at orchestration.

But do you think EVERYBODY loves John Williams work? I know a few people personally who think he is grossly overrated.

If his work was in fact "good" music, wouldn't everybody like it or at least acknowledge that it's good music?

You may not like XYZ car, but if it got 50 mpg on the highway you'd at least have to acknowledge that it gets good gas mileage. I mean if got the best gas mileage of any car on the planet, you couldn't even argue that there was something better. So hate the car or not, you'd have to admit at least that much.

It is the use of the terms good and bad that I have a problem with when talking about music.

Want to say that a song is technically well constructed per whatever criteria we've somehow decided to adapt over these hundreds of years? Fine. I'll go that far. But that doesn't make that automatically good music if almost everybody who listens to it thinks it's boring as hell.

And please don't tell me that there isn't classical music out there that is properly constructed that the musical community in general doesn't think is boring as hell because there is. Tons of it.

I could, if I wanted to, construct a simple piece of music that followed all the rules of classical composition.

1) It doesn't automatically make it good music.

2) It doesn't automatically mean that people will like it.

3) It doesn't automatically mean that I have no talent.

There are plenty of people with so called "talent" that make music that, let's just say, isn't as well received as music by other composers.

But if music is "good" music, shouldn't everybody like it?

I'm sorry, but no argument in the world is going to convince me that you can put clinical definitions on something that deals with people's emotions.

We don't all love Bach.

We don't all hate Wagtunes. (Yes, I have my fans)

And no, I'm not comparing myself to Bach. I don't write mathematically.

But that doesn't make my music good or bad no more than it makes Bach's music good or bad.

Because emotions are not good or bad.

[fluffy_little_something]

I know it is hardware, but the DX5 sounds very impressive, is there an emulation of it?
It does seem to sound better than the DX7, or maybe it's just the wooden panel and metal housing